As Rinse Kloek already mentioned, the Sup2T has only 1M entries, but a shared pool of TCAM space.
Sup2T#show platform hardware cef maximum-routes Fib-size: 1024k (1048576), shared-size: 1016k (1040384), shared-usage: 151k(155130) Protocol Max-routes Use-shared-region Dedicated -------- ---------- ----------------- --------- IPV4 1017k Yes 1k IPV4-MCAST 1017k Yes 1k IPV6 1017k Yes 1k IPV6-MCAST 1017k Yes 1k MPLS 1017k Yes 1k EoMPLS 1017k Yes 1k VPLS-IPV4-MCAST 1017k Yes 1k VPLS-IPV6-MCAST 1017k Yes 1k There is no repartitioning needed on the Sup2T. Cheers, Chris Am 05/11/13 17:18, schrieb Jon Lewis: > Your paste formatting got all screwy, but it looks like the Sup2TXL claims it > can do both 1M v4 routes _and_ half a million v6 routes simultaneously. I've > heard that from others, but also read the specs to be the same as the 3BXL. > I wonder if anyone from cisco can shed some light on this? > > On the Sup2T-XL, had you done any mls cef maximum-routes tuning? The page > below both states that the PFC4XL has no more FIB capacity than the PFC3XL, > and that the default split on the PFC4XL is 512k IPv4 routes. This doesn't > appear consistent with what you're seeing. > > http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/switches/ps5718/ps708/white_paper_c11-676346.html > > The FIB in the PFC4 contains 256 K entries, while the FIB in the PFC4XL > contains 1 million entries. These are the same as their PFC3x forwarding > engine counterparts. The FIB in the PFC4 contains prefix entries for IPv4 and > IPv6 global address, IPv4 and IPv6 multicast addresses and MPLS label > entries. There is a level of partitioning that exists to ensure there is > always some space available for different types of forwarding entries. There > is some flexibility from a user configuration standpoint that allows these > partition boundaries to be changed to accommodate more of one type of > forwarding entry. For example, in the PFC4XL, the default setting provides > for 512 K IPv4 entries, and this can be increased through configuration > control to support up to 1 M entries if required. > > On Tue, 5 Nov 2013, Christian Schmit wrote: > >> >> Today I tested a Sup2T-XL and a Sup720BXL in the lab with full bgp feeds for >> ipv4 and ipv6. >> To my understanding the hardware capacity for the FIB TCAM is the same for >> Sup720-BXL and Sup2T-XL. >> Sup2T-XL output of "sh platform hardware capacity":CAT6500-RC2TXL#sh >> platform hardware capacity | begin L3 Forwarding Resources >> L3 Forwarding Resources FIB TCAM usage: >> Total Used %Used 72 bits (IPv4, MPLS, >> EoM) 1048576 465980 44% 144 bits (IP mcast, >> IPv6) 524288 14903 3% 288 bits (IPv6 >> mcast) 262144 1 1% >> detail: Protocol Used >> %Used IPv4 465978 >> 44% MPLS >> 1 1% EoM >> 1 1% >> IPv6 14894 >> 3% IPv4 mcast 9 >> 1% IPv6 mcast 1 >> 1% >> Adjacency usage: Total Used >> %Used 1048576 >> 32018 3% >> >> Sup720BXL output of "sh platform hardware capacity": (FIB TCAM partitioned >> with "mls cef maximum-routes ip 768") >> CAT6500-RC720BXL#sh platform hardware capacity | begin L3 Forwarding >> Resources >> >> L3 Forwarding Resources >> FIB TCAM usage: Total Used >> %Used >> 72 bits (IPv4, MPLS, EoM) 802816 467348 >> 58% >> 144 bits (IP mcast, IPv6) 122880 14970 >> 12% >> >> detail: Protocol Used %Used >> IPv4 467338 >> 58% >> MPLS 9 >> 1% >> EoM 1 >> 1% >> >> IPv6 14963 >> 12% >> IPv4 mcast 4 >> 1% >> IPv6 mcast 3 >> 1% >> >> Adjacency usage: Total Used %Used >> 1048576 1481 >> 1% >> >> The release notes say: >> >> -XL mode: >> >> · IPv4 and MPLS: Up to 1,007,000 routes >> · IPv4 multicast and IPv6 unicast and multicast: Up to 503,000 routes >> >> "These are the theoretical maximum numbers of routes for the supported >> protocols (the maximums are not supported simultaneously):" >> >> The above output of the Sup2T-XL seems to say that the Sup2T-XL has a larger >> FIB TCAM (2M) than the Sup720-BXL. >> >> Christian >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] >> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp >> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ >> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Jon Lewis, MCP :) | I route > | therefore you are > _________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________ > _______________________________________________ > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
